This document summarizes key points from Chapter 9 of Brown's book on principles of language learning and teaching. It discusses cross-linguistic influence (CLI) and learner language. There are 6 categories of difficulty in the contrastive analysis hypothesis. CLI considers influence between all existing language systems, not just the first language. Factors determining CLI include typology, the second language, and proficiency level. Error analysis examines errors from all sources. Learner language develops through random, emergent, systemic, and stabilization stages. Variability in learner language depends on context. Fossilization occurs when incorrect forms become permanent. Feedback on errors should consider affective and cognitive aspects.

1. Chapter 9
Cross-linguistic Influence (CLI) &
Learner Language
(pp. 248-283)
By :
Sudheep Ramasamy (GS
35817)
Shyamini Sivanesan (GS
36229)
Katpagam Murugan (GS
36323)
Brown, D. H. (2007). Principles of language learning and
teaching. (5th
ed.). White Plains, NY: Addison
Wesley Longman, Inc.

2. Preview
 The contrastive analysis
hypothesis ( CAH)
 From the CAH to CLI (cross-
linguistic influence)
 Error analysis
 Mistakes and errors
 Errors in error analysis
 Sources of errors
 Stages of learner language
development
 Variability in learner
language
 Fossilization

3. Background
 Cross-linguistic influence, is an important
factor to consider in the study of foreign
language acquisition in general
 In acquiring the language, the learner
begins with a fully acquired linguistic
system.

4. CLI orTransfer?
 CLI considers the interaction between
existing linguistic system(s) during the
process of acquiring another language,
rather than assume that the L1 is the
only potential source of transfer.

5. CLI orTransfer?
 CLI studies have shown that an existing
second language, even if not acquired
completely, can interfere in the
performance of the L3.

6. The Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis
(CAH) (1)
 Deeply rooted in the behavioristic and structuralist
approaches, the CAH claimed that the principal
barrier to L2 is the interference of L1 system with
the 2nd
system.

7. The Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis
(CAH) (2)
 Clifford Prator (1967) captured the essence of the
grammatical hierarchy (Stockwell, Bowen, and
Martin, 1965) in six categories of difficulty –it was
applicable to both grammatical and phonological
features of language.

8. Six categories of hierarchy of difficulty (1)
(a native English speaker learning Spanish as L2)
 Level 0- no difference or contrast is present
between the two languages.The learner can simply
transfer a sound, structure, or lexical item from the
native language to the target language.
 Level 1 –coalescence of two items in the native
language become coalesced into essentially one
item in the target language. Example: English 3rd
p.
possessives require gender distinction (his/her) and
in Spanish they do not (su)

9.  Level 2 Under differentiation –an item in the
native language is absent in the target
language.The learner must avoid that item.
Example: (adjectives in Spanish require gender
(alto/alta)
 Level 3 Reinterpretation –an item that exists in
the native language is given a new shape or
distribution. Example: new phonemes require
new distribution of speech articulators -/r/, etc.
Six categories of hierarchy of difficulty (2)
(a native English speaker learning Spanish as L2)

10.  Level 4. Over differentiation –a new item entirely,
bearing any similarity to the native language item,
must be learned. Example: English speakers must
learn the use of determiners in Spanish –man is
mortal/El hombre es mortal.
 Level 5. Split –one item in the native language
becomes two or more in the target language requiring
the learner to make a new distinction. English
speakers must learn the distinction between (ser) and
(estar)
Six categories of hierarchy of difficulty (3)
(a native English speaker learning Spanish as L2)

11. From the CAH to CLI (1)
 The process could not account for all linguistic
problems or situations not even with the 6
categories. Lastly, the predictions of difficulty level
could not be verified with reliability.
 The attempt to predict difficulty by means of
contrastive analysis was called the strong version of
the CAH (Wardaugh, 1970) –a version that he
believed unrealistic and impractible.

12. From the CAH to CLI (2)
 Wardaugh also recognized the weak version of the
CAH – one in which the linguistic difficulties can be
more profitably explained by teachers and linguists.
 The so-called weak version of the CAH is what remains
today under the label cross-linguistic influence (CLI)

13. Some terminologies
 Transfer: the L1 influence on theTarget
Language (TL).
 Interlanguage transfer (lexical or morphological):
the interaction of a non-primary language with
a third or subsequent one.
 Crosslinguistic influence: all existing linguistic
systems play an equally important role in the
acquisition process of aTL.

14. Transfer in SLA
 only the primary language plays a role in
the acquisition process of a foreign one.

15. Why study CLI inTLA?
 It motivates a more inclusive theory of
transfer as it carefully considers all
existing systems in the learner’s mind and
 It imposes a re-evaluation of the already
existing theories and the relevance of
their claims.

16. Why does transfer occur?
Possible explanations:
learning is facilitated if the learner is able to
relate a new item or task to existing previous
knowledge.
learner will constantly seek to facilitate the
language-learning task by making use of
previously acquired linguistic knowledge

17. Factors that determine CLI
 What are the factors that trigger one
language to be activated over another
when it comes to learning a foreign
language?

18. Factors that determine CLI
 Typology
 The L2
 Proficiency Level

19. The Role ofTypology
 Considered to be one of the most
influential factors when it comes to
transfer.
 It is intuitive to assume that when it
comes to CLI, speakers will borrow more
from a language that is typologically
closer to the target language.

20. The role of the L2
 learners tend to use the L2 (or languages
other than the L1) as the source of cross-
linguistic influence

21. The L2 Factor: Example
 Studies on non-Europeans who acquire
their second European language support
this idea: Hindi and Chinese speakers with
knowledge of English who acquire
German as their third language will
transfer mainly from their L2 English onto
their L3 (Chandrasekhar, 1978;Vogel,
1992).

22. Proficiency Level
 InTLA proficiency must be considered,
not only in the target language, but also
in the other non-native language(s)
known by the speaker.

23. Proficiency Level
Logical assumption:
high proficiency in a background language
would make this language more likely to play a
role in the acquisition of a new one.
However,
low proficiency in a background language is
also a factor to be considered in CLI (De
Angelis, 2005).

24. Other Factors
 Age: inTLA the main claim is that older children
have a more accurate perception of linguistic
distance that could influence the source
language they use when transferring.
 Recency: learners are more likely to borrow
from a language that they actively use rather
than from other languages that they know but
do not often use.

25. Questions:
 How many categories of difficulties are there as
per Clifford Prator (1967) in (Stockwell, Bowen,
and Martin, 1965).
 What are the three terminologies used in CLI?
 What are the three factors that determine CLI?
 Can the second language affect the acquisition
of a third language?Yes or no?

26. Mistakes & Errors…
MISTAKES ERRORS
Performance error that is
either a random guess or a slip.
Reveals a portion of the
learner’s competence in the
target language.
Can be self corrected. Cannot be corrected.
Ex: Hesitations;
faux pas &
slips of the tongue.
Ex: Does Jane can sing? &
Aaron mays come.

27. Error Analysis (1)
 Significant since it reveals how language is
learned and acquired.
 Looks at errors that are attributable to all
possible sources.
 Celce- Murcia & Hawkins (1985).

28. Error Analysis (2)
 Problems:
- Placing too much attention on errors made &
ignoring the proper, clear use of language.
- Overemphasis on production data.
- Failure in accounting for the strategy of
avoidance.
- Focus is merely on the specifics rather than
viewing the language as a whole.

29. Identifying & Describing Errors (1)
 Learners linguistic system is on a constant roller- coaster ride
since new information comes in and through it, existing
structures either get overlapped or revised resulting in the
instability of the learner’s system.
 Corder’s (1979) model: Helps identify erroneous utterances in
L2.
 Focus: Overt errors (totally nonsensical/ ungrammatical) &
covert errors (grammatically correct but, doesn’t jive with the
context at hand).

30. Identifying & Describing Errors (2)
 Translation is used as an indicator of native language
interference.
 Global Errors: Hinders communication since no one can infer the
meaning behind what’s been said.
 Local Errors: Correction’s are not necessary since the hearer’s
able to get the gist of what’s being said.

31. Source of Errors…

32. Stages of Learner Language Development (1)
 4 stages:
(I) RANDOM
- Learners have a preconceived notion that there is some systematic
order to things & make a wild guess as an experimental front.
- Can lead to inconsistencies though (John cans sing vs. John can
singing).
(II)EMERGENT
The learner is more consistent in learning the language rules.
- Backsliding concept:
- U - Shaped learning concept:

33. Stages of Learner Language Development (2)
(III) SYSTEMIC
- The learner is able to manifest more consistency in producing the L2
since it resembles the target language’s system.
(IV) STABILIZATION
- The learner produces less errors & has mastered the system to the
point of fluency.
- - Learners can self correct their errors!
A: Many fish are in the lake. These fish are serving in the restaurants near the lake.
B: (Laughs) The fish are serving?
A: (Laughs) Oh no, the fish are being served in the restaurants!
(Taken from the book: p/g 268)

34. Variability in Learner Language…
 Tarone (1988) - focused her research on contextual variability
- Suggested four categories of variation:
1. Linguistic Context
2. Psychological Processing Factors
3. Social Context
4. Language Function
 Extent to which both linguistic and situational contexts may
help to systematically describe what appear simply as
unexplained variation.

35. Fossilization…
 Encountered in a learner’s language various erroneous features .
 This phenomenon is most saliently manifested phonologically in
‘foreign accents’ in the speech of those who have learned a L2
after puberty (chapter 3).
 The relatively permanent incorporation of incorrect linguistic
forms into a person’s second language competence has been
referred to as FOSSILIZATION.
 It is a normal and natural stage for many learners and should not
be viewed as some sort of terminal illness.

36. ErrorTreatment…
 Should errors be treated? How they should be treated?When?
 Fossilization may be the result of too many green lights when
there should have been some yellow or red lights.
 Vigil and Oller (1976) provided feedback about these questions
with the following model:

37. Affective/Cognitive Feedback for
ErrorTreatment…

38. Feedback…
 Affective:
1. (+ve) Keep talking; I’m
listening
2. (neutral ) I’m not sure I
want to continue this
conversation.
3. (-ve)This conversation is
over
 Cognitive:
1. (+ve) I understand your
message; it’s clear.
2. (neutral) I’m not sure if I
correctly understand you or
not.
3. (-ve)I don’t understand
what you are saying; it’s
not clear.

39. 7 Basic Options & Possible Features:
 Basic Options:
1. To treat or to ignore.
2. To treat immediately or delay.
3. To transfer treatment (other
learners) or not.
4. To transfer to another individual,
subgroup or the whole class.
5. To return , or not, to original error
maker after treatment.
6. To allow other learners to initiate
treatment.
7. To test for efficacy of the
treatment.
 Possible Features:
1. Fact or error indicated
2. Location indicated.
3. Opportunity for new attempt
given.
4. Model provided.
5. Error type indicated.
6. Remedy indicated.
7. Improvement indicated.
8. Praise indicated.

40. THANKYOU.